The idea is much, much older than your project. Consider ipv6, and everyone is TRYING to adopt that.
Repeat after me: nobody will use an alternate root.
PS: Yes, I know what namecoin is, and the idea is stupid. It may not be an alternate traditional dns root, but the point is exactly the same.
There are tons of examples from history of things that people thought would never change or technologies that were thought to be dead in the water that ended up completely displacing previous alternatives.
Pretty much every technological communication technology falls into that category.
Adoption will be incredibly slow or won't happen at all up until a certain point, where the tail of exponential growth kicks in and suddenly, it's everywhere. Look at mobile phones: it took years after the introduction of mobile phones for them to become ubiquitous. I doubt anyone could have predicted that there would be more mobile phones than people in the world within ten years.
I'm not saying that namecoin will take over. I do think it is possible, depending on what happens with the regular DNS system. At the moment, the need for an alternative is just not there for most people. That may not be true forever.
Look at IPv6: from the current state of IPv6 adoption, it would be possible to throw up your hands and declare it a failure, and say that it will never happen. I think that there will come a point where the price of IPv4 addresses is high enough to push widespread adoption, and at that point, everyone will be using it at once. And afterwards, people will look back and wonder why it took so long and how things could change over night. That's just the way things work.
Mobile phones (and before that "car phones") solved a problem that benefited practically everyone. It was a matter of price dropping not a matter of benefit.
There are people that care about this issue but not enough to ever hit a tipping point.
P2P exploded once people realized that they could participate in it to get content that they want. What makes you think this would be any different?
That's enough of a tipping point: everyone who wants to access stuff which makes a government angry knows to install the "uncensored Internet plugin", and the censorship measure becomes pointless.
It could be made easier if Google indexed .bit content, but even if they don't, another search engine will take up this niche, as astalavista.box.sk did more than a decade ago.
Also, they could sidestep the DNS censorship issue, by spidering the .bit sites, but indexing them by numeric IP rather than DNS names.
And as soon as the site operator moves to a different VPS host, all links get broken.
Look, I don't expect the current DNS system to suddenly collapse. Who knows what the future holds, though? It's only been 20 years since the Soviet Union fell. Perhaps in 20 years, we have a new Union oppressing people on a massive scale. Decentralised mechanisms for communication look a whole lot more interesting when your life is on the line.
Lobbyists fight wars in self interest, hackers innovate for the people. In the end, evolution always wins.
The short term and long term have a tendency to conflict.
There's a lot of power, I think, to end an argument against SOPA with "...and, at the end of the day, it won't stop anyone. It won't work." Having functional, working systems only bolsters that argument, and thus helps, rather than hurts, the case against this kind of ludicrous legislation.
100% in agreement with this. Take spam which is a much larger significant problem. In order to eliminate spam you'd have to get everyone to completely change the email protocol habits usage etc. There is no way to patch over it. That hasn't and isn't going to happen. Major providers who control access aren't going to go along with any alternate root. And getting people to program in individually alternative dns servers or do anything "technical" in nature won't create enough critical mass. (Majority of domain names registered even with the availability of alternate tlds and cctlds are still .com)
That has happened before. When YouTube got blocked for some stupid reason in Turkey for months, millions of people used alternative dns servers to bypass the block. It's easy enough to automate, which means it's simply a matter of demand.
They could of course force you to give up your domain physically, by seizing your server. As a non-US citizen, my primary concern is relying on nameservers located in the US. My machines are located in Sweden. Of course, that's no guarantee that they would be safe from the FBI...
It would be interesting to know if there are plans or ideas for decentralising even the registrar role, for example assigning domains through votes across multiple nodes...
If namecoin started to "just work" out of the box, that would change everything in regards to how likely this is to take over from the centralised DNS system.
Considering that both Google and Mozilla are so against SOPA, I don't see this as being completely impossible. Then again, I don't see why governments couldn't make it illegal to be a namecoin peer either, if they are already causing enough issues to warrant the system to begin with.
Yes. But don't underestimate the power of add-ons/extensions.
It's clear from the very article of this submission that this is the case. For instance, the I2P fields are combined in a structure that best represents the resource on the I2P network. A different structure is necessary to represent a Tor or freenet resource identifier.
If Internet naming is going to be fragmented, I'd rather it not be wasted on Alternative DNS roots, which fall privy to the same fundamental problems as our current domain name system. A Namecoin system cannot be so easily censored.
But that's my point: why? I'm not saying they should implement a DNS root, I'm saying I don't see the benefit in using a new format, when:
1. The DNS packet format is compatible with existing resolvers, which eases the transition (for example, someone could use the new system without installing anything, by trusting a Namecoin resolving server)
2. It uses less space for the common use case - JSON is smaller than e.g. XML, but it's still hardly a small format.
3. It's extensible for other use cases (Tor, I2P) without bloating the common - see EDNS
Frankly, I think they're reinventing the wheel, poorly, by designing their own format.
Names registered with namecoin have to depend on some blobs which can be updated by the name owner. The blobs need a format of some kind, and since they're already using a different protocol than DNS to achieve this P2P system, they might as well use JSON.
Also, as I stated in my comment, the structure of JSON fits better for this type of system than DNS's formatting. DNS requires redundancy to describe round-robin, and it's not easy (or elegant) to express complex structures in DNS, compared to JSON.
One example of this in practice is the I2P field I mentioned before.
It is already possible - http://dot-bit.org/HowToBrowseBitDomains#Replace_your_DNS_se... . There are two traditional DNS servers that resolve .bit addresses.
Feel free to request your 3 namecoins to test things out. This should be enough for actually registering 1-2 domains at current prices.
Read here more about registering .bit domain yourself with namecoins (not buying 1 year registration with bitcoins!!!)
I also can't quite figure out if it's worth my time to set one of my computers at mining bitcoins, how long should I expect it to take me to mine enough to register a domain?
Simply buy or trade for them. The easiest way to do that, in my opinion (from a US-centric perspective) is to set up a Dwolla account, transfer a bit of money from your bank to Dwolla. Then transfer that money from Dwolla to an exchange (Mtgox and TradeHill are two examples), and then buy bitcoins at market rate.
Then you can use them to buy goods and services (including namecoin names). Bitcoins are the "currency". Namecoins are sort-of related (using the same underlying technology), but are a separate product.
However, you can purchase namecoins with bitcoins using bitcoin-namecoin exchanges like this one: https://exchange.bitparking.com/main
Also, to answer your question, mining is really ineffective for home users. I mean, if you have energy to waste on it, that's fine, but you'll find it's more economical to simply buy the bitcoins through bitcoin exchanges (Tradehill, MtGox) than it is to mine them.
Engineering such a thing to scale would be tough, but getting adoption might be easier than we think. It could be offered via click-to-install browser extensions and click-to-install free apps in app stores.
Of course, we're talking about Google. The US government wouldn't lightly block google.com. But it would start some sort of battle.
But there's no way to be certain because I can't make heads or tails of that spec page LoL.
I think the point of the story is not so much the details of the novel content in this RFC - I find it hard to take seriously an RFC with passages such as "I would suggest that Verisign offer [us the .bit and .nmc tlds] as a gesture of good faith so that we can profit all profit from strengthening the original intent of DNS and the potentially criminal monopoloy handed to them by the US Government" - but as pointing out that there is movement in Namecoin and asserting that Namecoin is relevant to the whole SOPA deal.
Still .bit isn't going to work today without special configuration, so it's not at all clear that publishing it from the root servers would break anyone that was already successfully using it.
Also, its sister technology, bitcoin, has the potential of circumventing the payment-processor (ex. MasterCard) type of censorship. (See how wikileaks is being shutdown/censored)
Can someone give an example of a domain that would be provided by this registrar?
Domain.bit would be the typical example...?
Although to use these domains you need to do some leg work right now, 'cos obviously no root domains support this TLD.
Easiest for me was to switch to one DNS server from this list http://dot-bit.org/HowToBrowseBitDomains#Use_a_DNS_server_th...